55380 réponses à ce sujet

[Annarl]

@CulturalGeekGirl good luck at your doctor's appointment!

@kromify your right about passion running high there and here.  Discusses are fun!  Well they are to me.  I always enjoy reading other people's opinions. 

Modifié par omearaee, 28 juin 2011 - 08:45 .

[kromify]

Tealsie wrote...

Sometimes things are well enough over there... but then they quite suddenly turn to a bad kind of disturbing, depravity...

ah yes... the necroboners. good times!  

[ipgd]

phyreblade74 wrote...

Exactly!  The whole game we listen to complaints about Meredith and her over-handedness.  And in the end it's ELTHINA who's killed?  I just don't get it. 

You don't get it, or you just don't agree with it?

What he was doing was making a symbolic attack upon the cultural institution that Elthina and the Chantry represent. He was not trying to solve the local Kirkwall problem, he was attempting to start a far reaching revolution by making a broad ideological action in order to polarize and galvanize the public.

Secondary to that, by removing Elthina from the equation, he was by-proxy authorizing Meredith to invoke the Right of Annulment and make herself an example of the injustices he opines against. He's sticking his head in the lion's mouth to prove they bite. His plan was contingent on Meredith surviving the attack and taking extreme actions agains the Circle mages.

[Annarl]

kromify wrote...

Tealsie wrote...

Sometimes things are well enough over there... but then they quite suddenly turn to a bad kind of disturbing, depravity...

ah yes... the necroboners. good times!  

Should I ask?  

[KnightofPhoenix]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

kromify wrote...

they just try to convert all of thedas or kill heathens. kinda like qunari

I do wonder what happens if they manage that and the Maker doesn't show. Because that would be awkward. Hurriedly rewriting the Chant of Light?

No, they'll say that there are enemies within who are impure.

Thus following the same old pattern of human behaviour. 

[kromify]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

kromify wrote...

they just try to convert all of thedas or kill heathens. kinda like qunari

I do wonder what happens if they manage that and the Maker doesn't show. Because that would be awkward. Hurriedly rewriting the Chant of Light?

um... oh... LOOK OVER THERE *runs away*

or just CONVERT ALL THE WORLD!

[kromify]

omearaee wrote...

kromify wrote...

Tealsie wrote...

Sometimes things are well enough over there... but then they quite suddenly turn to a bad kind of disturbing, depravity...

ah yes... the necroboners. good times!  

Should I ask?  

i wouldn't. it's safer that way

[phyreblade74]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

I'm about to head out to a doctor's appointment, but here is what we the grey are trying to say:

If you side with the Templars and Annul the circle you are killing innocents for no reason other than that they happen to be affiliated with people you think are wrong and dangerous.

If you bomb the chantry you are killing innocents for no reason other than that they happen to be affiliated with people you think are oppressive and dangerous.

The chantry isn't just a place of worship, it is a place of government and worship. It has a military, and its military has turned the city you live in into a police state. Imagine if [Real World Enemy of the State] were hiding out in a [Place of Worship]. Would it be wrong to attack that place of worship if that was your only chance to kill [Real world bad guy?] What if he decided to live in there, a leader whose military was actively killing people in [country you live in] while he said he was powerless to stop it.

I think we should be equally scared of authoritarianism and terrorism. And the Chantry are pretty clearly authoritarian. The problem is that kids today aren't scared of authoritarianism, but they're all scared of terrorism. If it weren't an authoritarian state that was being attacked, I'd have radically different views on the whole situation.

Actually, I side with the Templars because Anders blew up the Chantry to force me to finally take sides.  Hawke didn't WANT to annul the Circle but felt there was no other recourse once the Chantry was attacked like that.  If left to itself, the entire city will be attacked by an Exhalted March intent on bringing order back to Kirkwall and that's nothing up against what will happen in the meantime as scared people who've just seen their heart and center destroyed by an act of magic take whatever action they think most appropriate.  Anarchy and mayhem are not any sort of solution and what my Hawkes fight to avoid.  Hawke also goes on to save as many mages as she can in the course of thing, something she can't do otherwise.

Had Anders hoped to impress upon people how victimized mages were, rather, he should've blown up the Circle.  That would've made some bit of sense to me, honestly.  Bad things are happening there, so blow it up.  Perhaps then people would've seen the Circle as a horrible travesty, a terrible thing, and the mages as some kind of poor victims.  Would've been far easier to drum up sympathy for them at that point, I think.  Wait, there are innocent mages in there?  Well, then the act itself is wrong, right?

That's generally how I view it.  It's just wrong to attack the many because of the bad actions of a few.  I hated even the thought of annulling the Circle, mind you, and I blame that utterly on Anders, who forced me into a position where I had to do just that or lose the city entirely to some sort of anarchical violence.

Now, how bout that awesome elf, Fenris, huh?  Great guy, right?

[beckaliz]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

kromify wrote...

they just try to convert all of thedas or kill heathens. kinda like qunari

I do wonder what happens if they manage that and the Maker doesn't show. Because that would be awkward. Hurriedly rewriting the Chant of Light?

No, they'll say that there are enemies within who are impure.

Thus following the same old pattern of human behaviour. 

If you ever get close to a human
And human behaviour
Be ready, be ready to get confused

There's definitely, definitely, definitely no logic
To human behaviour
And there's no map
and a compass
wouldn't help at all

They're terribly moody
And human behaviour
Then all of a sudden turn happy

But, oh, to get involved in the exchange
Of human emotions
Is ever so, ever so satisfying


Bjork is my thing.

This song fits actually I think for both Anders and Fenris sometimes.

Modifié par beckaliz, 28 juin 2011 - 08:55 .

[Annarl]

kromify wrote...

omearaee wrote...

kromify wrote...

Tealsie wrote...

Sometimes things are well enough over there... but then they quite suddenly turn to a bad kind of disturbing, depravity...

ah yes... the necroboners. good times!  

Should I ask?  

i wouldn't. it's safer that way

Okay, I'll take your word for it. 

[Addai]

ipgd wrote...
There are plenty of examples in history of rather horrific acts done in the name of a good cause that were ultimately acknowledged as contributors towards social changes that are almost universally recognized as positive now. Look far enough back along the line of pretty much any movement and you'll find terrorists who knocked down those first walls, but history is written by the victors and we like to whitewash away anything that's less morally palatable than we might like.

That's like something out of a fortune cookie.  It sounds good, but it's pretty meaningless.  You're saying any vague, undefined ends- so long as someone, somewhere someday recognizes them as a good thing- justifies any act as means?  I know you're not saying that.  History may be written by the victors, but that doesn't necessarily make it any more or less bull**** than the revisionist historical narratives other people come up with.  Which is also why I was questioning the use of Moses, the French Revolution etc. as positive examples.

[Tealsie]

phyreblade74 wrote...
Now, how bout that awesome elf, Fenris, huh?  Great guy, right?

Oh yes. And that voice. mm-mm-mm

[KnightofPhoenix]

Addai67 wrote...
 History may be written by the victors, but that doesn't necessarily make it any more or less bull**** than the revisionist historical narratives other people come up with.  Which is also why I was questioning the use of Moses, the French Revolution etc. as positive examples.

Then there is no such thing as a positive example.

[phyreblade74]

ipgd wrote...

phyreblade74 wrote...

Exactly!  The whole game we listen to complaints about Meredith and her over-handedness.  And in the end it's ELTHINA who's killed?  I just don't get it. 

You don't get it, or you just don't agree with it?

What he was doing was making a symbolic attack upon the cultural institution that Elthina and the Chantry represent. He was not trying to solve the local Kirkwall problem, he was attempting to start a far reaching revolution by making a broad ideological action in order to polarize and galvanize the public.

Secondary to that, by removing Elthina from the equation, he was by-proxy authorizing Meredith to invoke the Right of Annulment and make herself an example of the injustices he opines against. He's sticking his head in the lion's mouth to prove they bite. His plan was contingent on Meredith surviving the attack and taking extreme actions agains the Circle mages.

No, I don't get it.  

Had he truly wanted to impress upon people the plight of the mages, why not blow them up?  Show the world how easily destroyed they are, how confining them leaves them vulnerable in the worst way to attack, that not even the Chantry can keep them safe.  By destroying the Chantry, rather, he gives credence to the idea mages are dangerous and need to be destroyed and/or controlled.  Now the Divine can go on to say, to all of Thedas, "See, see what happens when Templars are not allowed greater authority?  See what they can do to us?!"

Symbolically, his decision sucks.

[kromify]

Addai67 wrote...

ipgd wrote...
There are plenty of examples in history of rather horrific acts done in the name of a good cause that were ultimately acknowledged as contributors towards social changes that are almost universally recognized as positive now. Look far enough back along the line of pretty much any movement and you'll find terrorists who knocked down those first walls, but history is written by the victors and we like to whitewash away anything that's less morally palatable than we might like.

That's like something out of a fortune cookie.  It sounds good, but it's pretty meaningless.  You're saying any vague, undefined ends- so long as someone, somewhere someday recognizes them as a good thing- justifies any act as means?  I know you're not saying that.  History may be written by the victors, but that doesn't necessarily make it any more or less bull**** than the revisionist historical narratives other people come up with.  Which is also why I was questioning the use of Moses, the French Revolution etc. as positive examples.

if you want an example how about wwll and women's rights?

[DaiyoukaiGeisha]

Tealsie wrote...

phyreblade74 wrote...
Now, how bout that awesome elf, Fenris, huh?  Great guy, right?

Oh yes. And that voice. mm-mm-mm

I went back and played Origins recently and I swear I listened to every syllable the Templar at the entrance to Lothering said this time. Every.bloody.word.

Templar Dude With Fenris Voice:  "Um, we don't have any room here serrah. You see the darkspawn-"
Me: "Hrmm, repeat that please."
Templar Dude With Fenris Voice: "I said there is no-"
Me: "Wait, go back and say that last thing. I didn't quite get that."
Templar Dude With Fenris Voice: *sigh*

[kromify]

phyreblade74 wrote...

ipgd wrote...

phyreblade74 wrote...

Exactly!  The whole game we listen to complaints about Meredith and her over-handedness.  And in the end it's ELTHINA who's killed?  I just don't get it. 

You don't get it, or you just don't agree with it?

What he was doing was making a symbolic attack upon the cultural institution that Elthina and the Chantry represent. He was not trying to solve the local Kirkwall problem, he was attempting to start a far reaching revolution by making a broad ideological action in order to polarize and galvanize the public.

Secondary to that, by removing Elthina from the equation, he was by-proxy authorizing Meredith to invoke the Right of Annulment and make herself an example of the injustices he opines against. He's sticking his head in the lion's mouth to prove they bite. His plan was contingent on Meredith surviving the attack and taking extreme actions agains the Circle mages.

No, I don't get it.  

Had he truly wanted to impress upon people the plight of the mages, why not blow them up?  Show the world how easily destroyed they are, how confining them leaves them vulnerable in the worst way to attack, that not even the Chantry can keep them safe.  By destroying the Chantry, rather, he gives credence to the idea mages are dangerous and need to be destroyed and/or controlled.  Now the Divine can go on to say, to all of Thedas, "See, see what happens when Templars are not allowed greater authority?  See what they can do to us?!"

Symbolically, his decision sucks.

but blowing up the chantry worked!!

[ipgd]

Addai67 wrote...

That's like something out of a fortune cookie.  It sounds good, but it's pretty meaningless.  You're saying any vague, undefined ends- so long as someone, somewhere someday recognizes them as a good thing- justifies any act as means?  I know you're not saying that.  History may be written by the victors, but that doesn't necessarily make it any more or less bull**** than the revisionist historical narratives other people come up with.  Which is also why I was questioning the use of Moses, the French Revolution etc. as positive examples.

No -- I'm just saying that terrorism is heavily spun and demonized in the eyes of the public. In revolutions that fail or are ideologically opposed to a culture, those actions and methods are highlighted and pushed to the forefront; in movements that are successful, and in line with our culturally accepted morals, the terrorism is swept under the rug and we are left to believe that it is a tactic only used by evil men for evil causes.

I'm saying that people might have a different perspective on terrorism if they had a more objective view of its use in history vs. its modern media depictions.

phyreblade74 wrote...

No, I don't get it.  

Had he truly wanted to impress upon people the plight of the mages, why not blow them up?  Show the world how easily destroyed they are, how confining them leaves them vulnerable in the worst way to attack, that not even the Chantry can keep them safe.  By destroying the Chantry, rather, he gives credence to the idea mages are dangerous and need to be destroyed and/or controlled.  Now the Divine can go on to say, to all of Thedas, "See, see what happens when Templars are not allowed greater authority?  See what they can do to us?!"

Symbolically, his decision sucks.

That wouldn't have really accomplished the same thing. By blowing up the Chantry, he was attacking the institution that is largely responsible for the cultural attitudes towards mages.

Drumming up sympathy for the mages wasn't the point. He wanted to set the Chantry so against the mages that anyone born with magical skill would have absolutely no choice but to band together and fight for their lives, or be killed. He was striking against the idea of compromise, and removing the chance of compromise for everyone -- including the mages, whom will have no recourse or opportunity to surrender peacefully and will therefor be forced to fight for their freedom. That was part of it.

Polarization.

Modifié par ipgd, 28 juin 2011 - 09:06 .

[tankgirly]

Wow, is something happened overnight? Cause this thread had just exceed the speed limit for the first time in months!

@kromify, we don't know what's in store for us in DAIII, but from the habit BioWare's been developing recently, I have my reservation about whether it's right blowing up the chantry.

[KnightofPhoenix]

phyreblade74 wrote...
No, I don't get it.  

Had he truly wanted to impress upon people the plight of the mages, why not blow them up?  Show the world how easily destroyed they are, how confining them leaves them vulnerable in the worst way to attack, that not even the Chantry can keep them safe.  By destroying the Chantry, rather, he gives credence to the idea mages are dangerous and need to be destroyed and/or controlled.  Now the Divine can go on to say, to all of Thedas, "See, see what happens when Templars are not allowed greater authority?  See what they can do to us?!"

Symbolically, his decision sucks.

Well blowing up mages will have mages become even more self-hating, and would confirm Merediths' words. That the Chantry is protecting mages from their own stupidity.

Tactically, Anders' act makes sense. He wants Meredith to over-react, essentially making both himself and the Circle martyrs, so that other mages would be angry, inspired and thus radicalize, while the Chantry is spreading its forces thin and thus is mroe susceptible to crumble. In that sense, he is operating very much in the same mindset as a certain brand of modern international terrorism.

Now strategically, his act was reckless and foolish. Mages could salvage something out of the mess he partially created, but it wouldn't be thanks to him, but in spite of what he did.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 28 juin 2011 - 09:09 .

[phyreblade74]

kromify wrote...

phyreblade74 wrote...

ipgd wrote...

phyreblade74 wrote...

Exactly!  The whole game we listen to complaints about Meredith and her over-handedness.  And in the end it's ELTHINA who's killed?  I just don't get it. 

You don't get it, or you just don't agree with it?

What he was doing was making a symbolic attack upon the cultural institution that Elthina and the Chantry represent. He was not trying to solve the local Kirkwall problem, he was attempting to start a far reaching revolution by making a broad ideological action in order to polarize and galvanize the public.

Secondary to that, by removing Elthina from the equation, he was by-proxy authorizing Meredith to invoke the Right of Annulment and make herself an example of the injustices he opines against. He's sticking his head in the lion's mouth to prove they bite. His plan was contingent on Meredith surviving the attack and taking extreme actions agains the Circle mages.

No, I don't get it.  

Had he truly wanted to impress upon people the plight of the mages, why not blow them up?  Show the world how easily destroyed they are, how confining them leaves them vulnerable in the worst way to attack, that not even the Chantry can keep them safe.  By destroying the Chantry, rather, he gives credence to the idea mages are dangerous and need to be destroyed and/or controlled.  Now the Divine can go on to say, to all of Thedas, "See, see what happens when Templars are not allowed greater authority?  See what they can do to us?!"

Symbolically, his decision sucks.

but blowing up the chantry worked!!

Did it?  What ends up happening in Thedas as a result of Anders' action is left pretty much up in the air at the end of my game.  Did you get a different ending?  Wild.

[ipgd]

phyreblade74 wrote...

Did it?  What ends up happening in Thedas as a result of Anders' action is left pretty much up in the air at the end of my game.  Did you get a different ending?  Wild.

It did, absolutely. His goal was to polarize Thedas and start a revolutionary war. He was 100% successful in that regard.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...


No, they'll say that there are enemies within who are impure.

Thus following the same old pattern of human behaviour. 

Always changing the terms so they can never be met or refuted.

Would they then try to... uproot these enemies? Because I see that going badly.

And thus like all other institutions and social arrangements, it will inevitably start collapsing in and of itself and pave the way for something else.

How beautifully flawed human history is. Brings a tear to the eye.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 28 juin 2011 - 09:14 .